Comparing Virtual and Physical educational computing environments using four main characteristics.

As colleges look to deliver more valuable IT resources, there is a trend to transition to virtual environments and BYOPC. I have found that while this addresses two common characteristics of educational computing resources, it introduces new challenges in two other areas. Bottom line, there is no perfect computing environment. The virtual desktop holds great value but there seems to remain a need for at least some physical computing space.

Consistent
Consistency is important when delivering services to a broad set of students. Both virtual and physical labs allow software and computing resources to be managed centrally. Faculty can rely on all students having similar experiences across all computing platforms when it comes to resource allocation. However, the virtual environment can suffer in consistency as it relies on network performance. Wireless disruptions, home or apartment networks, and the performance of the end user’s device are just some factors of consistency.

Controlled
An environment can be consistent and still be uncontrolled. A physical lab space can be tightly controlled during testing and evaluations. In a virtual lab, students have access to a consistent set of software and computing resources. A virtual environment, on its own, can be highly controlled. But as a resource it introduces a variety of challenges when there is a need to manage and control a BYOPC endpoint.

Accessible
Virtual Labs are highly accessible and enable students to use resources at any time and from anywhere. They also allow for concurrency, solving a utilization problem. Physical labs being used for teaching often have empty seats, further restricting students from accessing computing resources.

Scalable
Virtual labs allow for scaling of resources as well as scaling seat counts. Without being constrained by physical space requirements, you can increase your virtual environment essentially at will. Physical labs are much harder to allocate and manage space. Specialized computing resources such as large data storage or GPU compute can be cost-prohibitive and ineffecient when scaled out in a physical space.

If we examine both options we can make better decisions when planning support for curriculum demands

Virtual – Moderately consistent, Moderately controlled, Highly accessible, Highly scalable

Physical – Highly consistent, Highly controlled, Fairly accessible, Barely scalable

We can use these characteristics to match project needs

Example: All undergraduates need access to a core set of software. (Must be Accessible, Must be Scalable, Must be Consistent). A virtual environment makes the most sense

Example: A course needs a computing environment for testing and exams (Must be Controlled, Must be Consistent, Must be Accessible). A physical environment makes the most sense

A more realistic example is something like the following:

The college curriculum is introducing more data and compute intensive coursework.

Using the characteristics above we can start asking questions such as:

Consistent/Accessible

• Is this in class work or homework?
• What specific courses will be using this?

Controlled

• Will students be expected to use this environment for testing and evaluation?

Scalable

• How many students will be using this in the first year?
• What are the actual computing requirements?
• Will this increase over time?